Reversing the bandwagon that ran over Tim Hunt

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/jun/16/reversing-the-bandwagon-that-ran-over-tim-hunt

Version 0 of 1.

Now that there has been time for some quiet reflection, I feel I must raise a voice against the tsunami of opprobrium that has fallen on Prof Tim Hunt. I, like most other feminists, was appalled by what he said, but the action of UCL in effectively dismissing him was surely excessive (Scientist quits after sexism row, 11 June). Who among us can pretend we have never said anything foolish? Prof Hunt has apologised unreservedly, and the best response to his statement about women in laboratories was that of the Twitter campaign #distractinglysexy (Report, 13 June), which was both to the point and very funny indeed.

Who is served by Prof Hunt’s hounding out of the academic community? He is a Nobel prize winner and, as such, surely still has a contribution to make to science and, thereby, society. I urge UCL and the other institutions from which he felt required to resign to call him back.

Let the punishment fit the crime.Lydia MasseyReading, Berkshire

• Tim Hunt does not deserve the vilification he is receiving in the press, exemplified by Helen Cahill’s article (The unseen women scientists behind Tim Hunt’s Nobel prize, 12 June, theguardian.com). I did my undergraduate research project in Tim’s lab in the 1980s. He then encouraged me to stay on and continue that research in the lab over the summer, and found relevant funding. He further arranged for me to visit a lab in East Berlin that was working on what appeared to be a similar enzyme.

Tim is one of the most enthusiastic people in science and backs up his enthusiasm with concrete advice and support. He has continued to advise on my career in science editing whenever I have asked for help.Joan MarshLondon

• So pleased to read Michele Hanson’s article on Tim Hunt (A certain age, 16 June, G2). I have felt furious on Tim and his wife’s behalf. This is an example of the media at its worst. All sense of fairness is forgotten in order to get on the bandwagon of a story – and the Guardian is not without blame. To make things more balanced, please would you publish not just the names of the organisations Tim has been asked to leave but the names of the self-righteous individuals who demanded that he leave?Anne LindleyKing’s Lynn, Norfolk

• It was not so long ago that the western world went to the wall to defend Charlie Hebdo’s “right to offend”, but it appears that neither our principles nor our resilience extend to tolerating the unfortunate remarks by Prof Tim Hunt, who must lose his position for a thoughtless aside. Our hypocrisy knows no bounds.Peter MartindaleCastle Bytham, Lincolnshire

• So Boris Johnson is concerned about the overreaction to Sir Tim Hunt’s lighthearted remarks (theguardian.com, 16 June). It may be that the consequences for Sir Tim are too great, but Boris, like others, fails to recognise what underlies those little quips.

Misogyny is not simply a matter of recognisable inequality, discrimination or hostility. It is a subconscious state of mind, and is deeply ingrained in our culture. Most men are genuinely unaware of their misogyny and are shocked when their behaviour is pointed out.

How many women themselves actually think about the ways sexism manifests itself? So why should men seriously consider how their attitudes impact on women? Men think that if they share some household tasks, especially cooking, it shows they respect women! Too many women think this is enough. Feminism is not taken seriously enough by either gender.

There are jokes and then there are subconscious revelations. If Sir Tim had lightheartedly made an antisemitic quip, what would have been the reaction?Christine CourtneyRousay, Orkney

• Over the last few days, a number of your commentators have bandied the word “misogyny” around as though it were some stronger synonym for “sexism”, for example in the brouhaha surrounding Professor Tim Hunt’s recent ill-advised comments at a press conference (If we don’t raise a voice against sexism it will never go away, 15 June).

“Sexism” relates to treating individuals differently according to their gender. “Sexist” behaviour may range from rational/desirable to the converse with a broad spectrum, from eg male squaddies (sensibly) undertaking the bulk of heavy lifting duties, to opening a door for your wife and politely giving her precedence, down to some erroneous and illegal prior prejudice by employers that females are inherently less able/intelligent than their male counterparts.

In contrast, “misogyny” means “hatred of women”, as might be exemplified by serial murderers, rapists or other disturbed male individuals. I suggest that you update the Guardian style guide as necessary.

I doubt very much that Sir Tim Hunt, distinguished Nobel laureate and research scientist, who is married long-term to a professor of immunology whom he fell for while she was working in his lab, “hates” women at all – quite the converse.Andy SmithKingston upon Thames

• In a week where Prof Tim Hunt resigned following comments that female scientists are likely to cry when their work is criticised, I was shocked and dismayed to listen to surgeon Henry Marsh on Radio 4’s Bookclub last Thursday.

To the apparent amusement of the audience and presenter James Naughtie, Mr Marsh described how the difficulties inherent in building expertise in brain surgery in the NHS were resolved – the poorest and most disadvantaged in our society were practised on first before aspiring surgeons graduated to the middle class. Only when surgeons were considered expert enough could they progress to the “insured middle classes”.

The consequences of surgery going wrong were comprehensively described by Mr Marsh, leaving us in no doubt about the risks to health and life for anyone subject to these procedures. I was left feeling that poor people’s lives matter less, even in a publicly owned and funded service.

Upset female scientists, lose your job; talk about damaging poor people’s brains, raise a polite laugh. Class prejudice does not appear to attract the same moral outrage as sexism, even where the consequences are far more severe.Kevin MunroAberdare

• Amid all the furore and disintegration of a Nobel prize-winning scientist’s career, as a woman I would like to know what came before and after these three sentences in his lecture.Rachel WalkerBath

• I am a female PhD student in a male-dominated area of science, so I have very strong feelings about the pressing need to encourage more women into science and to change the culture encountered by those of us who are already here. However, I find the treatment of Prof Tim Hunt’s recent comments in the media distressing and infuriating.

First of all, those comments were initially made at an obscure conference, and thus could hardly have had much of a negative effect on the general perception of women in science if they had not been picked up and broadcasted so widely. But there is a deeper issue here. In my experience, the vast majority of male scientists are good people who are not at all prejudiced against women, and though it is true that as a woman I have a persistent sense of being an outsider, the main cause of this feeling is not misogyny but simply that many male academics are nervous about dealing with women. Partly this may be due to the fact that academics, both male and female, are often people who experience some degree of social awkwardness, which is heightened when dealing with the opposite gender. But highly publicised witch-hunts like this one significantly compound the problem, because they make it inevitable that when a male scientist interacts with a female colleague, he cannot help but have in mind that any poorly judged comment might one day be used against him. A male scientist may well think twice about taking a female PhD student if he knows that a single complaint from her could ruin his entire career, and can we really blame him? Thus the furore over Prof Hunt’s comments can only make women feel more unwelcome in science and further decrease our employment prospects – precisely the opposite effect to what its originators presumably intended.

Finally, over and above any repercussions for women in science, I feel it is a tragedy that Prof Hunt’s name came to the public’s attention only because of these comments. The media, and particularly social media, can be utterly merciless in these matters: careers are ruined and excellent work thrown away without any allowance for the fact that people do sometimes make silly mistakes. I want to be clear – there is no place in science for attitudes like those expressed by Tim Hunt, and we should be doing all we can to fight them. Nonetheless, there is something deeply wrong about the way science is regarded and reported on in our society when people know more and care more about a single offhand comment than a career of excellence and a Nobel prize.Name and address supplied

• There are many regrettable aspects to the Tim Hunt affair, perhaps the most – the words he spoke in jest, pour épater la bourgeoisie. “For they sow the wind and they reap the whirlwind” etc – in Hunt’s case a tornado. As my late head of department, Peter Baker, was wont to say, “Academic freedom is the right of academics to make fools of themselves – occasionally”. He may have said it to me – or himself, or maybe even you.

Nevertheless, that is not the only concern. University College London’s hasty action in requesting Hunt’s resignation instead of waiting for the storm to abate, as it surely will, should not be seen as simply a crowd-pleasing, grandstanding gesture by a trigger-happy HR department.

It is yet another exercise in administrative power over academe. Another scalp – useful in making sure that the rest of the pesky academics stay in line.

If they can do this to someone as eminent as Hunt, for no real cause other than temporary embarrassment of an institution that manifestly gives women a fair deal, what else will they do if someone raises real issues – such as the gross disparity in remuneration between academic and senior admin staff, or the appalling conditions of employment of temporary staff and junior academics? Men and women alike!

UCL’s heavy-handed reaction to Tim Hunt’s lapse in good taste and sense should be rescinded – quickly.Richard NaftalinLondon

• The real story of Tim Hunt’s major contribution to our understanding of cell division shines a far clearer light on Tim Hunt’s character than the misleading impression conveyed in Helen Cahill’s article. She failed to mention that Tim Hunt discovered cyclin, the protein crucial to cell division, while teaching students on the physiology course at the marine biology laboratory, Woods Hole, where each summer students from around the world are introduced to cell and molecular biology. The paper describing the discovery of cyclin (Evans et al, 1983, Cell 33, p389) was published by Tim with the set of students on the course who helped him to perform some of the experiments. This is the real Tim Hunt: inspiring, encouraging, teaching, supporting and enthusing students to pursue science. I joined Tim’s lab the next year and count myself infinitely fortunate to have been his student. To me, and many other men and women who worked with him, Tim has always been supportive, and over the last 30 years he has proved to be one of the kindest and most generous of men that I know; completely different from the picture painted by the succession of commentators in your pages.

That remarkable summer in Woods Hole, Tim recognised the unusual results contained in a relatively simple set of experiments performed as part of a summer school, and he had the insight to realise that this could be the key to cell division. It took several years to convince the scientific community that he was correct, and – as is the nature of science – many other scientists, women and men, made important contributions, but it was in recognition of his discovery and his insight that he was awarded a share of the 2001 Nobel prize.Jonathon PinesUniversity of Cambridge